I heard this from a buddy who’s in tight with the Irish network.
Dear Lord: please let this be true!
Dear Lord: please let this be true!
Fitz to replace Freeman as the next ND Irish Head Coach?
- Thread starter CatManTrue
- Start date
- Status
I am pretty sure that notre dame is interested in winning games
I'm a Fitz fan - he did a ton for NU - but when its funny, its funny.
Not a lawyer, but if one is alleging wrongful discharge, I believe you have to make efforts to mitigate damages, i.e, try to find another job.
Correct, and Fitz certainly couldn't turn down the ND job if it were offered to him, without risking a substantial reduction in his claim for damages. He could, however, turn down a less prestigious coaching job, say in the MAC for example, at lesser compensation. As my old Contracts professor used to say, if you are wrongfully discharged from a leading lady role in a Broadway show, you don't have to accept an Off Broadway role as Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm in order to mitigate your damages.
So then the university, presumably, is asking what he did pursue during discovery. Since NU is only top job in terms of pay (not program respect, career growth, etc) he would have had to pursue pretty much any P4 job.
He is a hot commodity.
ND fans know he won’t be there for long.
It dOSU offers him the job after Day leaves, then he is gone.
I don't think he has to "pursue" any particular job. What he needs to evaluate are jobs that are offered to him.
Fitz is not a hot commodity anymore. If he wants to coach again then he needs to pursue jobs like he did running backs in the mid-1990s.
ND offering him the job is probably a Gaelic gaslit pipe dream.
Still: it would please me to no end to see him get the job, go 5-7 in season #1, 6-6 in season #2, and then get fired after claiming “hashtag we improved don’t care!”.
Fitz’s bubble, ego, and nepotism led to his firing. His philosophies will get him run out of South Bend quickly.
Sadly, as a Fitz fan for years, I have to agree. Not sure where he ends up after this but it won't be South Bend.
Fitz and his counsel aren’t dumb. They likely aren’t actively pursuing jobs right now, but listening and taking notes if those calls come.. but doubt there are any calls actually happening right now.
Remember holding our collective breaths the last time Fitz was offered by ND? I remember listening to the report of that on National news. It was a huge deal at the time. Braun and NU's remarkable 2023 season may have been even bigger news. How things change.
Exactly. It would be foolish for Fitz to actively pursue other jobs right now, and I can't imagine that any other high profile job offers will be coming his way either.
And to add, he would have to accept interviews for parallel or better opportunities. The irony being that if he is not offered any, why? That’s when the expert witnesses come in. Plenty of schools have hires shady guys that could win games…so….
Before NC reminds me of contract law, I’m speaking to the reputational damages. If he wins on the contract, I think the reputational case could be interesting.
Disagree. Different level than standard case. These folks have agents. He does have to pursue, imho, comparable or better positions. Of course the risk comes when his agent is deposed.
And that will be a mitigation argument in addition to my last post. Fun fact - law doesn’t care about strategy. We have some rules….
This is where the trial lawyer part kicks in. Bunch of motions in limine. One to bar Defense calling the agent. Argument is too easy. Mitigation and relevance to reputational damages.
No shit.
Fitz and his team will argue that the offers aren’t coming because of the inappropriate process and firing conducted by NU/Schill. Then the judge will decide which side is more legitimate.
Regardless that only speaks to punitive damages rather than recovery of Fitz’s NU contract (not legalese, but best I can do as a non-lawyer).
It does not speak only to punitive, my non legally trained friend. Consequential damaged of the firing led to damage to PFs reputation and future employment. That’s the legal part. And it relies on PF not being implicated in a meaningful way in the scandal AND that he was desirable beforehand…based on his accomplishments.
And yes, his attorneys will make their argument, and to the disappointment of many here, the defense will make theirs. Which will touch upon interview opportunities before and after the firing.
And mitigation is a thing. If PF is not returning calls, if his agent is NO LONGER making calls assuming he ever had, then the defense gets to argue mitigation.
Liking my bet more and more with each passing day. But what do I know.
Honestly asking as a non-lawyer… isn’t the bulk of Fitz’s claim breach of contract for the firing and the process that preceded it? I’ve long thought the punitive claims are more “pie in the sky,” the kind of thing you ask for when you have the chance because you can’t ask for them later.
And, again, neither Fitz nor Harsin nor Webb are morons. Guarantee you that they’ll do the minimum to keep claims intact and defensible. But also about 99.999% sure that no such inbound calls are actually happening.
The claims are breach of oral contract, breach of written contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, false light, and interference with a business expectancy. Other than the contract stuff, they are all torts and unlikely to collect much, imo.
I think the duty to mitigate has always been affirmative (plaintiff needs to have made reasonable efforts). That said, all he’d have to do is call the ADs at Big Ten and SEC schools and see if they’d hire him.
Again - no lawyer, but he may be expected to even pursue lesser roles if the university could convince a jury that it would not do long term damage to his career. E.g. Hugh Freeze rehabbing at Liberty when no one else would touch him. This would mitigate damages without long.term career harm.
Edit, this is contract law not criminal. I don't think it is alleged by the former.coach that NU is criminally liable for anything, although, from an outsider's standpoint, there may be criminal negligence by the coach in failing to protect a minor from a known crime
Last edited:
I recognize that you are a non-lawyer but the fact is that you understand the situation far better than our friend IGNORE2. I really have trouble understanding a lot of his babbling, and I have tried a whole bunch of high exposure civil cases. Frankly, I'm tired of responding to him, and remain of the opinion that all cases will settle before anyone is deposed or written discovery is exchanged. Could be wrong, but we'll see.
Not the way it works in my view. If the defense can establish that Fitz turned down a job comparable to his at NU, then they might have something. But he certainly doesn't have a duty to take some lower level job in an effort to rehabilitate his career.
I'm in the same place. I've always been grateful for Fitz. His firing was a train wreck - showing lack of awareness and competency on Schill/Gragg's part. The success we had last season was despite our president and AD, not because of them.
Still, as it stands today I would much rather have Braun in charge than Fitz. Fitz had lost the locker room in his last full season. He was trying to right the ship after his (unforgivable) hiring of JON, but we would still have the same OC today if Fitz were here. Plus, I was truly disappointed at his weasel-like, unaccountable response to the hazing scandal. Braun - and hopefully Lujan - give us a fresh perspective that we know the players buy into. And values-wise, seem like the right fit.
Another honest question… isn’t that’s basically what I’m saying, namely that the actual contract stuff is the meat of the case and the damages beyond that are “why not ask for it?”
Harsin: “Hey, would you hire Fitz tomorrow if you fired your coach? [wink]”
I have said this more than once, that I have never seen a coach/program go in the tank as what Fitz did with NU football from 2019-2022. It was a total collapse that would never happen under a true top tier HC. Fitz might have to settle at a MAC HC position at best, or another lesser conference. Any illusions regarding to his coaching ability have been downgraded.
I think that would be the best way to go for for him if he didn't want to go to a lesser conference school as HC or an assistant. I think he blew any shot at a major Division 1A program though as HC. The program's collapse is the meat of the issue, the hazing scandal is just the icing on the cake.
As a fellow non-lawyer, this is my understanding as well.
If NU had fired Fitz simply for going 1-11 and refused to pay his full payout, then there would be a pay-out per the arbitration or mediation laws in Fitz’s contract - somewhere between 0 and his full buyout ($65-70M).
Even if Fitz had sued after a “for cause” firing - meaning his incompetence and/or negligence on the field - then he would still have sued. And probably won $30-40M. Maybe the whole enchilada.
Unfortunately, Schill is a moron, and firing Fitz in the way he did more than doubled the school’s liability.
Perhaps moreso.
Northwestern University leadership is, sadly, now an oxymoron.
This last sentence is something all our bored lawyers can relate to (pun intended).
We’re also assuming he’s been offered any jobs.
Again: if Schill had simply fired him for football negligence, then Fitz would probably be coaching somewhere and waiting for a massive check.
Schill, again, is terrible at his job.
Fitz will get paid more money to sit on his couch. Why would anyone as lazy as he’s been want to work when he could get paid more not to?
I lose more pride in my Nu degree everyday.
His claims would relate to damages flowing from a breach of contract. The punitive is crap. So argument one is the value of his contract. Having not read the lawsuit, I would expect another count in defamation or intention interference of business relations relating to future earnings.
Those touting the $100MM payout bank on both. Punitive is going nowhere in light of the allegations at the time. So if PF is to get more than contract, has to show he was viable high dollar coach in the moment he was fired. Prior and subsequent offers are relevant.
As for breach of existing, has a duty to mitigate, including lessor position to a reasonable degree. These things collectively create interesting discovery and expert testimony possibilities.
And all this presumes no connection to the hazing.
I think one could argue that in mitigating by rebuilding reputation that he should interview for lessor too. The degrees being subject to debate. It’s not comparable - it’s mitigating losses. Now and in the future.
- Status
Similar threads
